Skip to content
Open access

Comparing Robustness-Oriented Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods: A Cross-Domain Benchmark of MEGAN and Recent Aggregation-Based Approaches in Engineering Selection Problems

Sep 2026 · Science Engineering and Technology · Vol 6, pp. 145-169 · 0 citations · 24 references

Abstract

Robustness-oriented multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods aim to produce rankings that remain stable against the choice of normalisation and weighting. Yet, new members of this family are rarely validated independently. This study presents an independent cross-domain benchmark of MEGAN (Multi-criteria Evaluation via Gradual-weighting and Aggregation of Normalised distance matrices) against three established robustness-oriented methods, the Combined Compromise Solution (COCOSO), the Alternative Ranking Order Method Accounting for Two-Step Normalisation (AROMAN), and the Root Assessment Method (RAM), and four conventional reference methods (TOPSIS, VIKOR, WASPAS, EDAS). The benchmark pairs the synthetic renewable energy grid dataset of the original MEGAN study, used for verification, with a real-world flotation machine selection problem. Robustness claims were tested under systematic normalisation and weighting substitution, Monte Carlo weight perturbation, and leave-one-out rank reversal. Agreement proved strongly dataset-dependent: MEGAN aligned with the conventional methods on the flotation problem (Spearman near 0.70) but produced near-opposite rankings on the energy problem (−0.84), and the claimed normalisation and weighting insensitivity was not reproduced, while rank-reversal resistance held fully. A formal analysis shows that the second direction-unification step of MEGAN exactly cancels the normalisation’s direction handling, so every cost criterion is effectively treated as a benefit criterion. Removing this redundant step yields the corrected variant MEGAN-S, which raised the mean rank correlation from −0.29 to +0.60 and from +0.61 to +0.97 on the two problems, while retaining full rank-reversal resistance. Robustness of an MCDM method is thus better understood as a property of the problem structure than a fixed guarantee.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Open access 2027

Benchmarking Aggregation-Based MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis of Ranking Consistency, Stability, and Robustness

Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods are widely applied in Decision Support Systems (DSS) to address selection problems involving multiple criteria. However, differences in aggregation mechanisms may affect ranking consistency, stability, and robustness under changing decision conditions. This study presents a...

S. Sumanto, Mochamad Wahyudi, Lise Pujiastuti · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Performance Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in Decision Support Systems

This study proposes an integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) framework based on the CRISUS weighting method and five ranking approaches, namely Simple Additive Weighting (SAW), Multi-Objective Optimization on the basis of Ratio Analysis (MOORA), Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment (WASPAS), Grey Relat...

M. I. Takaendengan · 5 citations
Open access Sep 2026

Comparative analysis of the simple additive weighting method and the deviation-based pairwise assessment ratio technique for material selection

Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques are widely used to rank alternatives defined by multiple criteria. However, due to fundamental algorithmic differences, they often yield different results for the same problem. This study presents a comparative analysis of two MCDM approaches with distinct historical bac...

Duc Trung Do, Mehmet Ozcalici, Van Dua Tran et al. · 0 citations
Open access

Comparative Evaluation of Ratio-Based MCDM Methods: Performance and Ranking Stability under DAM Weighting

Ratio-based Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods provide practical approaches for ranking alternatives, but differences in normalization and aggregation mechanisms can produce different rankings and levels of stability. This study comparatively evaluates ratio-based MCDM methods under a common Data Assessment...

M. I. Takaendengan, Irma Anggraeni, Febri Dwi Irawati et al. · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

An Integrated MCDM Framework for Sensitivity of Weighting Methods and Ranking Aggregation: Evidence From Financial Performance Evaluation

This study proposes an integrated framework for evaluating alternatives in Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) by addressing weight sensitivity and ranking integration. The aim is to examine the effects of different criteria-weighting methods on ranking results and to develop a more consistent decision-making structu...

Nazife Şahin Macit · 0 citations
Open access 2027

Enhanced Root Assessment Method for Multi-Criteria Decision Making: An Improved Framework for Robust Alternative Ranking

Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods are widely used to address complex decision problems involving multiple alternatives and criteria with different characteristics. However, ranking outcomes may be sensitive to normalization mechanisms, criterion weights, and aggregation processes, particularly when benefit...

A. Kalua, A. Kewo, Susi Hendartie et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.